
AbstractBACKGROUNDDurum wheat semolina is the best raw material for pasta production and its protein content and gluten strength are essential for cooking quality. The need to develop rapid methods to speed up quality control makes near‐infrared spectroscopy (NIR) a useful method that is widely accepted in the cereal sector. In this study, two non‐destructive and rapid technologies, a low‐cost sensor providing a short wavelength NIR range (swNIR: 700–1100 nm) and a handheld NIR spectrometer (NIR: 1600–2400 nm), were employed to evaluate semolina quality.The spectra data were correlated with chemical (protein content) and rheological parameters (i.e., Gluten Index, Alveograph®, Sedimentation test, GlutoPeak®). A partial least squares (PLS) model was used to compare the efficacy of swNIR and NIR.RESULTSThe protein content was the reference parameter that correlated best with the spectra data and provided the best regression model (r model = 0.9788 for NIR and 0.9561 for swNIR). GlutoPeak indices also correlated well with spectral data, particularly with swNIR spectra. A provisional multivariate model was applied to classify semolina samples in quality classes by using their spectra. Better modeling efficiency was obtained for swNIR.CONCLUSIONThe results highlighted the advantages of a pocket‐sized low cost sensor (swNIR), which is easier to use directly at the sample source than laboratory instruments or more expensive portable devices. © 2020 Society of Chemical Industry
Quality Control, Spectroscopy, Near-Infrared, handheld devices; near infrared spectroscopy; quality; semolina;, Seeds, Rheology, Triticum, Plant Proteins
Quality Control, Spectroscopy, Near-Infrared, handheld devices; near infrared spectroscopy; quality; semolina;, Seeds, Rheology, Triticum, Plant Proteins
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 20 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
